Skip to main content

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: N Hoey Date: Jul 17, 2013 10:58am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: ?? wtf ??

"SYG wasn't the defense used"?

Um, sure it was. In pretrial hearings, the judge allowed it as an "affirmative defense". That meant the defense was not going to attempt to say it wasn't GZ who shot TM. Without the ability to make an "affirmative" defense, that's what they would have had to do, claim it wasn't him who pulled the trigger.

SYG meant his attorneys could say, "Yes, it was our client here who shot him but he had a valid legal reason to do so".

That's why it was so difficult for the prosecution. They had to prove beyond reasonable doubt that it was NOT self defense. All the conflicting testimony was enough to give the jury reasonable doubt.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ColdRain108 Date: Jul 17, 2013 12:09pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: ?? wtf ??

um, no it wasn't.

""SYG meant his attorneys could say, "Yes, it was our client here who shot him but he had a valid legal reason to do so". ""

That is just a regular run-of-the-mill self defense, pretty much as it is in every state - your life is threatened you have the right to meet that threat with deadly force.

SYG is not the same as self defense - a variation possibly. SYG would have been his defense if he had backed the kid into a corner and then shot him when he tried to bust his way out with force, if he had been proven to be the physical aggressor and forced the kid to fight with him he would have used SYG, and that is a F'ed up law, but it had little to do with this case, except in the media trial. It was never employed as his defense.

In the end it was just plain and simple self defense, the same as would have been used in all 50 states.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: N Hoey Date: Jul 17, 2013 12:56pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: ?? wtf ??

You're simply wrong.

"According to the instructions given to the jury, Zimmerman had "no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force" if he reasonably feared for his life or great bodily harm."

That is what SYG specifically makes possible in FL and differs from the "regular run-of-the-mill self defense". Many folks in other non SYG states have been convicted of manslaughter even in self defense situations. That's why FL legislators expanded their state self defense laws to make use of deadly force totally legal.

As I already stated, in pretrial hearings, the judge sustained a motion from the defense lawyers to make use of the SYG provisions in FL law as an affirmative defense.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ColdRain108 Date: Jul 19, 2013 11:24am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: ?? wtf ??


(CNN) -- George Zimmerman, set to stand trial in the 2012 shooting death of teenager Trayvon Martin, on Tuesday waived his right to a "stand your ground" pretrial immunity hearing. Zimmerman's attorneys have decided they will try this as a self-defense case.

Florida's deadly force law, also called "stand your ground", was passed in 2005. It allows people to meet "force with force" if they believe they or someone else is in danger of being seriously harmed by an assailant. Under the law, a person can use deadly force anywhere as long as he is not engaged in an unlawful activity, is being attacked in a place he has a right to be, and reasonably believes that his life and safety are in danger as a result of an overt act or perceived threat committed by someone else.

In a pretrial immunity hearing, a judge would have ruled whether Zimmerman's actions were protected under the "stand your ground" law; a ruling in favor of the defendant would have meant that no criminal or civil trial could proceed.


JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -- The George Zimmerman murder trial verdict has promoted anger and confusion in North Florida. And even though it wasn't used as Zimmerman's defense, it has called into question the state's "stand your ground" law.


Why didn't Zimmerman's defense team use Stand Your Ground?
Zimmerman's attorneys themselves dismissed the relevance of the statute, which allows armed citizens to use deadly force with no obligation to retreat from a confrontation if they reasonably believe their lives are threatened. Perhaps Zimmerman's team shied away from using the law—also known as "shoot first"—because they knew it would be controversial and felt that they didn't need it to win on self-defense.

They may also have calculated that it would hurt their case, says Laura Cutilletta, a senior attorney at the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence and an expert on state gun laws. "We think the reason the defense did not request a shoot-first hearing or raise the law at trial is because doing so would contradict their theory of the case—that Zimmerman was being held down and beaten and had no opportunity to retreat," she says. "Shoot-first would only be applicable if he was conceding that he had an opportunity to retreat and that instead of doing so, he used deadly force."

So while SYG makes splashier headlines, it is just not the case here. Trial by media and popular vote - damn I'm glad we don't have that legal system, or the Italian one where a think tank imagines what happened and charge from there.

This post was modified by Little Sense on 2013-07-19 18:24:44